Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 22, 2012 11:29am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

http://www.hitchcockwiki.com/wiki/Copyright_status_of_Hitchcock_films#UK_Copyright:_Hitchcock.27s_British_Films_.281925-39.29

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: anh Mike Date: Jan 22, 2012 1:00pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

I guess the GATT guidelines are useless. NEXT ON HIT list is TV. They will find away.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 23, 2012 6:45am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

From the way I look at this the recent court decision only said what GATT already said.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: HektorT Date: Jan 30, 2012 5:07am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

This decision just upholds the legality of GATT. GATT has been challenged in court many times:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golan_v._Gonzales

This article gives an in-depth summary of the ruling:
http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/162404/Copyright/Supreme+Court+Upholds+Restoration+Of+US+Copyright+Protection+For+Foreign+Works+In+The+Public+Domain

It also points out:
The Golan decision leaves in place an intricate statutory scheme governing restored works. Dealing with restored works means navigating the many definitions, rules, and exceptions in the law, not to mention the implementing regulations issued by the Copyright Office. For instance, merely to qualify as a "restored work," a work of authorship not only must have originated in a "source country" that qualifies as an "eligible country" (two terms defined in yet further detail), but the work must also not have been published in the United States within 30 days following its publication in the source country.7 Likewise, there are detailed Copyright Office regulations spelling out the procedures for issuing a "Notice of Intent to Enforce" a restored copyright—known as an "NIE"—to a reliance party that began exploiting the work before restoration. In sum, this is dense terrain.

@Kevin: Sometimes when a topic is in the news (like this decision and the MegaUpload takedown) companies review their own exposure to copyright issues. So maybe that's why they decided to DMCA you now. Otherwise, maybe they just wanted to wait until GATT was 100% rock-solid legal grounds for DMCA. Now it is. If you read the above wikipedia link, you'll see that one court has previously ruled GATT unconstitutional. You've got lots of other GATT eligible DMCA-able stuff on your site. At the least you should pull them off your international site and completely pull anything that has an NIE.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 22, 2012 4:44pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

I'm not even sure we know what the heck any of this means. It looks to me like ITV could have claimed copyrights in the last 15 years. They didn't. Is this a gotcha?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 22, 2012 11:37am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

Specifically the complaint from ITV was for the following films.

Secret Agent, Jamaica Inn, Young and Innocent, Under Capricorn, The Lady Vanishes, the Phantom Fiend and the Man who knew too much.

I didn't have the rest of these files, but they were in the federal register.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffVideo-Cellar Date: Jan 22, 2012 1:46pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

Surprising ITV claimed Under Capricorn. This film has never been in the public domain in the US. The film was first published in the US and was properly registered in 1949 and renewed in 1977. The rights were transferred to New York Community Trust, then sold on the Leo Guttman, who's catalogue ended up with King World. The film is currently owned by CBS TV Distribution (the successor-in-interest to King World Entertainment).

As to the other films, many of them had entered the public domain in the UK before the current copyright act came in. There are many transitional loopholes and grandfathering clauses in the law which mean that their copyrights could not be restored by the copyright extension in UK/European law in the mid 90s.

They are a little bit DMCA happy, but so are many people who don't genuinely own a copyright. You have to ask yourself why these films continue to be sold by the same companies over and over again and ITV and Studio Canal never take anyone to court.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 22, 2012 7:52pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

I don't really understand the court case. It only tells us what the law was way back in 1996. Do I have it wrong? It seems to me that a takedown notice would have stopped a lot of trouble. Why a half million downloads later is someone finally saying boo? What would anyone think? What did the hundreds of thousands of downloaders think? Like I did, they thought it was cool or noone cared.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elmagno Date: Jan 22, 2012 8:47pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: I hope billbarstad is ok

Funny to me, but I will be pulling Under Capricorn from my site, now that I know. bill uploaded it here along with a lot of other non PD stuff. He was very honest in a post saying he was new and eager back when he posted all those great films. I was just like him when I uncritically downloaded them--eager. But too much remains unclear. I've pulled Tulsa so many times it's in Utah now.

Whatever the new ruling means, the meaning won't be clear. PD is a wiggly world, to say the least. The record keeping is incomplete and fragmented. Of course mistakes are made.
Soldier on.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 24, 2012 12:44am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: I hope billbarstad is ok

At this point I think it means we shouldn't use the Hitchcock films.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Moongleam Date: Jan 23, 2012 8:53am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: I hope billbarstad is ok

Probably all of the regulars here are wondering where billbarstad is. We hope he comes back.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or Staffpicfixer Date: Jan 24, 2012 6:03am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: I hope billbarstad is ok

I'll add my hope that all is well with Billbarstad, and that he returns soon.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 22, 2012 11:41am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

Nobody needs copyright headaches. I think it might be indicated to err on the side of caution.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 22, 2012 12:02pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

Maybe someone could help me dig through this and help me understand what other films have been affected. I'm sure it's not none and I don't need to get sued. How all of these have been here for 5 years illegitimately is a bit of a conundrum. Why didn't ITV DMCA these a long time ago?

One batch of films I think needs re-examination is the Arthur Askey movies here. It looks like these may be restored. Also the British made Sherlock Holmes movies might not be kosher either. The TV is ok because UK TV shows are public domain after 50 years.

I think we are treading on thin ice with non-domestic titles.

This post was modified by Kevin VandeWettering on 2012-01-22 19:59:34

This post was modified by Kevin VandeWettering on 2012-01-22 20:02:51

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Mr Cranky Date: Jan 23, 2012 1:52am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

My Norton antivirus logs say Kevin VandeWettering's www.hitchcockwiki. link has "Fake AV Redirect 29". If the copyright notices come, then pull the files. But I've seen the sky fall before.

This post was modified by Mr Cranky on 2012-01-23 09:52:16

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Kevin VandeWettering Date: Jan 22, 2012 7:51pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

Hmmm. I don't find any problem with the link, but you may be right. Nobody use it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: anh Mike Date: Jan 24, 2012 9:52am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

I thought that also anyone could have posted that blog. In other words what EXACTLY DID THE SUPREME COURT SAY? Its not there job to investigate copyright claims internationally either. I would go by Gatt. the courts cannot contradict the laws in place but enforce them. Anyone can say the supreme court said such and such but the SUPREME COURT transcripts will prove it true or not.

I still see those sets for $5 at a local dept store in front of cashiers. Unless they are flying off the racks over night and then replacing them in the a.m. No one is really buying them.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jory2 Date: Jan 23, 2012 10:46am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: Hitchcock Films and GATT restoration

Leader of Ninjavideo online piracy site gets prison
Second Ninja Video admin is sentenced to prison
Megaupload Shutdown Means Other Companies Turning Off Useful Services
MegaUpload - Closed.
Rapidshare - status unknown
FileServe - Closing does not sell premium. File sharing already disabled.
FileJungle - Deleting files. Locked in the U.S..
UploadStation - Locked in the U.S..
FileSonic - the news is arbitrary (under FBI investigation). No longer allows sharing files.
VideoBB - Closed! would disappear soon.
Uploaded - Banned U.S. and the FBI went after the owners who are gone.
FilePost - Deleting all material (will leave executables, pdfs, txts)
Videoz - closed and locked in the countries affiliated with the USA.
4shared - Deleting files with copyright and waits in line at the FBI.
MediaFire - Called to testify in the next 90 days

"But I've seen the sky fall before"

Tell that to the people who won't be seeing the sky - period

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffDetective John Carter of Mars Date: Jan 24, 2012 4:14pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: GATT curlicues vs Harry Potter

news of the day
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2140887/waves-cyberlocker-web-sites-stop-filesharing